Email communication is a huge advantage for all involved parties.
Emails provide consumers with much better tools to control how they are being contacted. First, if treating emails as "in writing" (as they should), disputing a debt or demanding that collectors cease communication is much easier.
Second, setting rules to hide collection notices is a powerful tool not available in any other communication medium. 3rd party disclosure is therefore a lesser concern.
Third, email delivery is fast, and facilitates an efficient process, where less communications can be made to reach a settlement. Everything is in writing.
Fourth, email is significantly less confrontational than phone calls and causes much less stress to recipients.
Fifth, email is better than recording in keeping record of communication, making it even harder for collectors to hide acts of non compliance.
Email should be allowed, while keeping the sensitive parts of the message (disclosures, personal details etc) hidden - as an attachment or as a link that is part of an email.
Yes, email is more cost efficient to collectors - which is why using email should be conditional on collectors not charging the debtors any fees for their payments. The added profitability should be shares with the consumer.
Email rules allows hiding emails and routing them in ways that surpass any other communication method. In addition, since email "sender ID" is easier to demand and maintain, debtors will have an easier time managing what communication they receive, and when. As a result, there is no necessity for forcing specific times of email delivery.
Email isn't easier to access or view off the debtor's screen than a call (a call's content is actually harder to hide if you receive it among other people), text message or SMS.
The way regulation should handle sensitive information is by mandating that some information be an attachment, or in a link provided in the email, rather than the body of an email. If the attachment is encrypted or details are stored on a secured web page, no one will be able to access them. In fact, they will be much better protected than any other information relayed to the debtor.
Work emails should be handled differently, much like calls to a work place, which can also be accessed by the employer.
Debtors often respond with "I don't owe anything", which is vague and makes it harder to cater for their needs. If any rule making is needed, it is about the types of disputes a debtor may bring forth and the documentation needed for both the substantiation of that dispute (leaving the option for a dispute to be deemed frivolous) and what constitutes satisfaction of the dispute or proper proof. Otherwise, this is left for negotiation between individual collectors and debtors.
Work email can be handled in a foti-compliant manner, where the email body doesn't disclose the debt but includes content in a link, that is part of the email but isn't available for viewing by the administrator. Social media and text messages can be handled the same way.
If consumers can receive phone calls on Sundays, there's no reason for them to not accept emails. Controlling which messages you get and how they are routed and presented to you, including what alerts or sounds they make when received, is only possible with email. Email is far superior to any other communication medium.
osamet
1Email communication is a huge advantage for all involved parties. Emails provide consumers with much better tools to control how they are being contacted. First, if treating emails as "in writing" (as they should), disputing a debt or demanding that collectors cease communication is much easier. Second, setting rules to hide collection notices is a powerful tool not available in any other communication medium. 3rd party disclosure is therefore a lesser concern. Third, email delivery is fast, and facilitates an efficient process, where less communications can be made to reach a settlement. Everything is in writing. Fourth, email is significantly less confrontational than phone calls and causes much less stress to recipients. Fifth, email is better than recording in keeping record of communication, making it even harder for collectors to hide acts of non compliance. Email should be allowed, while keeping the sensitive parts of the message (disclosures, personal details etc) hidden - as an attachment or as a link that is part of an email. Yes, email is more cost efficient to collectors - which is why using email should be conditional on collectors not charging the debtors any fees for their payments. The added profitability should be shares with the consumer.
View this comment in the discussion thread
osamet
2
Email rules allows hiding emails and routing them in ways that surpass any other communication method. In addition, since email "sender ID" is easier to demand and maintain, debtors will have an easier time managing what communication they receive, and when. As a result, there is no necessity for forcing specific times of email delivery.
View this comment in the discussion thread
osamet
3Email isn't easier to access or view off the debtor's screen than a call (a call's content is actually harder to hide if you receive it among other people), text message or SMS. The way regulation should handle sensitive information is by mandating that some information be an attachment, or in a link provided in the email, rather than the body of an email. If the attachment is encrypted or details are stored on a secured web page, no one will be able to access them. In fact, they will be much better protected than any other information relayed to the debtor. Work emails should be handled differently, much like calls to a work place, which can also be accessed by the employer.
View this comment in the discussion thread
osamet
4
Debtors often respond with "I don't owe anything", which is vague and makes it harder to cater for their needs. If any rule making is needed, it is about the types of disputes a debtor may bring forth and the documentation needed for both the substantiation of that dispute (leaving the option for a dispute to be deemed frivolous) and what constitutes satisfaction of the dispute or proper proof. Otherwise, this is left for negotiation between individual collectors and debtors.
View this comment in the discussion thread
osamet
5
Work email can be handled in a foti-compliant manner, where the email body doesn't disclose the debt but includes content in a link, that is part of the email but isn't available for viewing by the administrator. Social media and text messages can be handled the same way.
View this comment in the discussion thread
osamet
6
Aren't fake collection companies using letters and phone calls very successfully already?
View this comment in the discussion thread
osamet
7
If consumers can receive phone calls on Sundays, there's no reason for them to not accept emails. Controlling which messages you get and how they are routed and presented to you, including what alerts or sounds they make when received, is only possible with email. Email is far superior to any other communication medium.
View this comment in the discussion thread